THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs ANKITBHAI KANTILAL MALAVIYA Advocate - R A LIMBADIYA — 146/2025

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 498(A),504,114. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBT020002762025

Filing Number

146/2025

Filing Date

21-Jan-2025

Registration No

146/2025

Registration Date

21-Jan-2025

Court

CIVIL COURT, BOTAD

Judge

4-Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 31-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11190007240026

Police Station

MAHILA POLICE STATION – BOTAD DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 498(A),504,114

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ANKITBHAI KANTILAL MALAVIYA Advocate - R A LIMBADIYA

  2. 2.ASHABEN WIFE OF KANTILAL RATNAJI MALVIYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted the accused Ankitbhai Kantilal Malaviya and Ashabben Kantilal Malaviya of charges under IPC Sections 498(A), 504, and 114, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations of cruelty, abusive language, and mental harassment against the complainant beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that while the complainant alleged mistreatment during her brief 15-20 day marriage, the core incident occurred in Parvat village (outside Botad jurisdiction), no FIR was filed there, and witness testimonies contained inconsistencies and contradictions that undermined the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-May-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  4. 20-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  5. 17-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  6. 04-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  7. 13-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  8. 05-Mar-2026

    Further Statement

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  9. 13-Feb-2026

    Further Statement

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  10. 22-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  11. 11-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  12. 13-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  13. 04-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  14. 28-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  15. 19-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  16. 20-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  17. 23-May-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    4Th Addl CIVIL Judge & JMFC

  18. 06-May-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    3Rd Addl CIVIL Judge & JMFC

  19. 08-Apr-2025

    Process To Accused

    3Rd Addl CIVIL Judge & JMFC

  20. 18-Mar-2025

    Process To Accused

    3Rd Addl CIVIL Judge & JMFC

  21. 18-Feb-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  22. 21-Jan-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 146/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused Ankitbhai Kantilal Malaviya and Ashabben Kantilal Malaviya of charges under IPC Sections 498(A), 504, and 114, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations of cruelty, abusive language, and mental harassment against the complainant beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that while the complainant alleged mistreatment during her brief 15-20 day marriage, the core incident occurred in Parvat village (outside Botad jurisdiction), no FIR was filed there, and witness testimonies contained inconsistencies and contradictions that undermined the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case